If a company isn’t willing to support steam deck/Linux through an easier support option like proton, I highly doubt they’ll be willing to support it with higher effort native ports.
As a hardcore Linux fan, the only way I see game devs publishing native Linux ports is when when it has a >30% market share.
But I’m pretty sure the publishers will still come up with excuses like “The Linux platform is uncontrollable; there is no way to verify the platform integrity because everyone has root”
As a hardcore Linux fan, the only way I see game devs publishing native Linux ports is when when it has a >30% market share.
For Valve Linux isn’t just another OS. It’s their Steam Deck platform which they could promote towards publishers the same way as console makers promote their platforms. This story once again shows that chasing Windows compatibility without using Windows is a stepping stone but not the final answer.
The cost to maintain “native” ports is too high to make sense for most developers.
PS:
Proton also makes it easier to preserve games since an “native” port would become incompatible overtime without work to adapt the software to changes in the system it’s running.
The cost to maintain “native” ports is too high to make sense for most developers.
If that was the case, no console ports would exist, except maybe Xbox because Xbox uses modified Windows internally.
Proton also makes it easier to preserve games since an “native” port would become incompatible overtime without work to adapt the software to changes in the system it’s running.
Inform yourself what Steam Linux Runtime is before making such comments. You are 100% wrong.
How fucking idiot would you have to be to complain about users sending bug reports. Linux users usually send very detailed bug reports, which can uncover bugs that might happen on all platforms.
Yes Linux users generate great reports because they care and usually are more knowledgeable.
But treat the reports cost time and work, and usually this problems will not happen for the majority of their use base.
So, as the company, you can have 0.1% of your sales generating 20% of extra work that will not benefit 99.9% of the users. It is easier and cheaper to cut that group (us Linux users) instead of support.
Yet another proof that Proton is a great stop-gap solution but Valve should be pushing game publishers to make native Linux ports.
If a company isn’t willing to support steam deck/Linux through an easier support option like proton, I highly doubt they’ll be willing to support it with higher effort native ports.
As a hardcore Linux fan, the only way I see game devs publishing native Linux ports is when when it has a >30% market share.
But I’m pretty sure the publishers will still come up with excuses like “The Linux platform is uncontrollable; there is no way to verify the platform integrity because everyone has root”
For Valve Linux isn’t just another OS. It’s their Steam Deck platform which they could promote towards publishers the same way as console makers promote their platforms. This story once again shows that chasing Windows compatibility without using Windows is a stepping stone but not the final answer.
The cost to maintain “native” ports is too high to make sense for most developers.
PS: Proton also makes it easier to preserve games since an “native” port would become incompatible overtime without work to adapt the software to changes in the system it’s running.
If that was the case, no console ports would exist, except maybe Xbox because Xbox uses modified Windows internally.
Inform yourself what Steam Linux Runtime is before making such comments. You are 100% wrong.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18845205
How fucking idiot would you have to be to complain about users sending bug reports. Linux users usually send very detailed bug reports, which can uncover bugs that might happen on all platforms.
Yes Linux users generate great reports because they care and usually are more knowledgeable.
But treat the reports cost time and work, and usually this problems will not happen for the majority of their use base.
So, as the company, you can have 0.1% of your sales generating 20% of extra work that will not benefit 99.9% of the users. It is easier and cheaper to cut that group (us Linux users) instead of support.